Sección VI Seguridad Pública
DE LA REFORMA E INVIOLABILIDAD DE LA CONSTITUCIÓN
P. O 19 DE ABRIL DE 2010 ALCANCE
During the post-Cold War period, security scholars and other interested actors began to examine the links between the environment and security in more detail. The way in which the environment has been linked with security in the post-Cold War period consolidates liberal approaches towards security by widening and deepening security to prioritise the security of individuals rather than states. This rests on the assumption that the protection and betterment of the world’s poor and marginalised peoples through sustainable development can ensure the collective security of the international community.176
However, critics of the links are uncomfortable with the evocation of ‘security’ as a primary means to improve the human condition and strengthen international society in the post-Cold War period.177 They question the dangerous and unforeseen consequences of the
securitisation of issues, such as the environment, for group or institutional advantage. Further, they suggest that the securitisation of issues such as underdevelopment and the environment foster fear while also favouring policies of containment and marginalises the places in which these issues occur.178
With these criticisms in mind, the following discussion focuses on three approaches that have linked the environment with security in the post-Cold War period. The first examined the environment as a societal stressor and sought to identify where issues such as resource scarcity, overpopulation and environmental degradation may increase the incidences of insecurity. The second focused on the security of individuals and incorporated the environment to the extent that it enabled states and individuals to secure access to food,
176 Mark R. Duffield, Development, Security and Unending War: Governing the World of Peoples (Polity 2007), 3;
Endre Begby and J Peter Burgess, ‘Human Security and Liberal Peace’ (2009) 1(1) Public Reason 91, 91; Mark R. Duffield, ‘The Liberal Way of Development and the Development—Security Impasse: Exploring the Global Life- Chance Divide’ (2010) 41(1) Secur Dialog 53, 55.
177 E.g. Barry Buzan, Jaap de Wilde and Ole Wæver, Security: A New Framework for Analysis (Lynne Rienner
1998); Jef Huysmans, ‘The European Union and the Securitization of Migration’ (2000) 38(5) JCMS 751.
178 Duffield, Development, Security and Unending War, 3-4; see also Rita Abrahamsen, ‘Blair's Africa: The Politics
59
energy, and livelihood for development and economic productivity. The third approach focuses specifically on the threat of climate change to state and human well-being. Each of these approaches invokes ‘security’ as a primary means to improve the human condition and strengthen international society.
3.3.1 Environmental Security
The first wave of environment/security linkages that emerged in the post-Cold War period argued that scarcity, overpopulation, and unequal resource allocation could be a powerful long-term stressor on societies.179 Proponents of this approach suggested that
environmental scarcity could occur in one of three ways: Supply induced, structural induced, and demand induced. The causes of such scarcity were attributed to the physical depletion of the environment, population induced consumption, and unequal resource allocation within a society.180
This research had a significant influence on the foreign policy and collective security strategies of some states. Countries such as Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and regional organisations such as the European Union, explicitly identified links between environmental scarcity and the increased risk of intra-state conflict in their international development, security, and humanitarian policies.181 For example, the United
Kingdom’s Cabinet Office Report argues that ‘a lack of effective government, weak security and poverty can all cause instability and will be exacerbated in the future by competition for resources, growing populations and climate change.’182 This link between environment and
security reveals the dominant assumption that ‘development’, which reduces poverty, improves well-being and generates hope, could reduce the alienation of individuals, and
179 E.g. Ehrlich and Ehrlich, 'Population Growth and Environmental Security', 224; Kaplan, ‘The Coming
Anarchy’; Bogale and Korf, 'To Share or Not to Share?', 743; Dalby, Security and Environmental Change, 16;.
180 Percival and Homer-Dixon, 'Environmental Scarcity', 280.
181 Government of Sweden, 'Preventing Violent Conflict - A Swedish Action Plan' (Ministry for Foreign Affairs,
1999) Study 1999:24 <http://www.sweden.gov.se/content/1/c6/02/01/61/aad1f9e6.pdf> accessed 5 May 2011, 16, 24; 'Shared Responsibility: Sweden’s Policy for Global Development' (Ministery for Foreign Affairs, 2003) Government Bill 2002/03:122 <http://www.government.se/legal-documents/2003/05/200203122/> accessed 20 June 2015; Javier Solana, 'A Secure Europe in a Better World: European Security Strategy' (European Union External Action 2 March 2011) <http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/78367.pdf> accessed 20 June 2015, 2-3; European External Action Service, 'Report on the Implementation of the European Security Strategy: Providing Security in a Changing World' (EEAS,, 2 March 2011) Doc S407/08
<http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/reports/104630.pdf> accessed 2 March 2011, 5; United States, 'Quadrennial Defense Review'; Government of Canada, 'Canada First Defence Strategy' (Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces, 27 July 2013)
<http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about/canada-first-defence-strategy.page> accessed 28 May 2015, ‘unequal access to resources and uneven economic distribution are proving to be increasing sources of regional tension even as existing low-intensity or frozen conflicts in Africa, South Asia, the Middle East and the Balkans remain largely unresolved.’; Government of Sweden, 'Aid Policy Framework: The Direction of Swedish Aid' (Government Offices of Sweden, 2014) Government Communication 2013/14:131
<http://www.regeringen.se/contentassets/6eef64a9a36e48ff9a95e4d6ad97ce84/aid-policy-framework> accessed 7 April 2015, 37; Council of the European Union, 'Main aspects and basic choices of the CFSP', 159-160;
60
thus lessen the risk of social tension and conflict.183 In this context, the environment was
seen as a potential threat to the security of the international community by undermining the development and security of individuals and communities. Commentators have identified this argument as embodying the outlook of post-Cold War liberal internationalism with its focus on democratic institutions, human rights, and economic liberalism.184
States, NSAs, and global institutions have responded to these concerns by creating development strategies to address the perceived causes of environmental scarcity. Many of the responses propose addressing the drivers of poverty, developing technological capabilities and improving land tenure.185 These proposals continue to frame the global
south and environmental insecurity as problems of underdevelopment that requires states, NSAs, and institutions from the global north to intervene to ensure the development of the global south and therefore prevent conflict.186 These arguments reaffirm the representation
of the global south as ‘other’, backward, in need of ‘improving’ and assimilating into the liberal international order.187 Barnett criticises this ‘selective interpretation’ because it
maintains security as ‘business-as-usual’ and continues the interpretation of the south by the north.188 It has silenced the wider debate over historical, structural, and wider contributors
to environmental degradation.189
More recent natural resource/conflict literature has sought to explain the causes of conflict in a way that takes into account the socio-economic context. The 2009 United Nations Environment Programme Report, From Conflict to Peacebuilding, argued that economic inequality and poverty create incentives for groups to capture resources by taking
183 Duffield, 'The Liberal Way of Development', 57.
184 Begby and Burgess, 'Human Security and Liberal Peace', 92; see also, Michael W. Doyle, ‘A More Perfect
Union? The Liberal Peace and the Challenge of Globalization’ (2000) 26(05) Rev Int Stud 081; Roland Paris, ‘Bringing the Leviathan Back In: Classical versus Contemporary Studies of the Liberal Peace’ (2006) 8(3) Int Stud Rev 425; Hanna Leonardsson and Gustav Rudd, ‘The ‘Local Turn’ in Peacebuilding: A Literature Review of Effective and Emancipatory Local Peacebuilding’ (2015) 36(5) Third World Quarterly 825.
185 Ayoob, 'Security in the Third World', 43; Mary Mellor, Feminism & Ecology (Polity Press 1997), 26; Kapoor,
'Hyper-Self-Reflexive Development', 628-629; Duffield, The New Wars, 36-37; Duffield, 'The Liberal Way of Development', 55
186 Barnett, The Meaning of Environmental Security 64-65; Duffield, The New Wars, chapter 2.
187 Plumwood, Feminism and the Mastery of Nature 16, 47-55; Barnett, The Meaning of Environmental Security
65; Mark R. Duffield, ‘Getting Savages to Fight Barbarians: Development, Security and the Colonial Present’ (2005) 5(2) Conflict, Security & Development 141, 155; Simon Dalby, ‘Peacebuilding and Environmental Security in the Anthropocene’ in Didier Péclard (ed), Environmental Peacebuilding: Managing Natural Resource
Conflicts in a Changing World: Swisspeace Annual Conference 2007 (Swisspeace 2009), 11.
188 Barnett, The Meaning of Environmental Security, 65; OECD, DAC Guidelines on Conflict, Peace and
Development Cooperation (Development Assistance Committee, 1997), 16.
189 Vaclav Smil, ‘China's Environment and Security: Simple Myths and Complex Realities’ (1997) 17(1) SAIS Rev
107, 107; Barnett, The Meaning of Environmental Security, 62-63.
189 Simon Dalby, ‘Security and Ecology in the Age of Globalisation’ in Geoffrey D. Dabelko (ed), Environmental
61
control of the resource rich territories.190 These assumptions are evident in the text of recent
UNSC resolutions concerning the exploitation of natural resources. In resolutions concerning the conflicts in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia, and the Central African Republic, the UNSC reiterates that the exploitation of natural resources should be used to aid the socio-economic development of these countries.191 These resolutions also
refer to the need to ensure ‘sustainable’ peace and development for these countries through the legitimate exploitation of natural resources.192 They emphasise that the ‘transparent and
effective management’ of natural resources is critical for sustainable peace and security.193
These statements by the Security Council repeat the arguments put forward by the UN Secretary General and UNEP that peace and security are anchored in sustainable development, which in turn is based upon the (sustainable) exploitation of natural resources. Therefore, they reaffirm liberal assumptions that the process of economic and social development, use of natural resources for economic growth, and the transference to liberal democratic governance, will address the drivers of underdevelopment and insecurity and thus increase the security of the international community.
Similar arguments concerning the role of democratic governance, economic liberalisation, and human rights are revealed in the body of literature examining the links between natural resources, conflict, and development. The effect of having an abundance of natural resources has been described as the ‘resource curse’ where it has had a detrimental effect on the security of states.194 Both academic and institutional literature seeking to
190 UNEP, From Conflict to Peacebuilding (2009) 8; see also Carl Bruch and others, ‘Post-Conflict Peace Building
and Natural Resources’ (2008) 19 YbInt'l EnvL 58 59.
191 UNSC Resolution 2128 (10 December 2013) UN Doc S/RES/2128, ¶12; see also UNSC Resolution 1903
Liberia (17 December 2009) UN Doc S/RES/1903, ¶9(d); UNSC Resolution 2021 (29 November 2011) UN Doc S/RES/2021, preamble; UNSC Resolution 2198 (29 January 2015) UN Doc S/RES/2198 , preamble.
192 UNSC Res 2198 (2015), preamble; UNSC Resolution 1533 DRC (12 March 2004) UN Doc S/RES/1533 ,
preamble; UNSC Res 2128 (2013), preamble; ; see also Presidential Statement 5 (Peace and security in Africa) (13 May 2013) UN Doc S/PRST/2013/5, 2.
193 UNSC Res 2198 (2015), preamble ¶14.
194 Christa N Brunnschweiler and Erwin H. Bulte, ‘Natural Resources and Violent Conflict: Resource Abundance,
Dependence, and the Onset of Civil Wars’ (2009) 61(4) Oxford Econ Pap 651 651. The relationship between the abundance of resources and conflict is a significant body of research. For an overview of the issues, see Philippe Le Billon, ‘The Political Ecology of War: Natural Resources and Armed Conflicts’ (2001) 20(5) Polit Geogr 561; Karen Ballentine and Heiko Nitzschke, Beyond Greed and Grievance: Policy Lessons from Studies in the Political
Economy of Armed Conflict (Program on Economic Agendas in Civil Wars, International Peace Academy Policy
Report, 2003); Paul Collier and Anke Hoeffler, ‘Greed and Grievance in Civil War’ (2004) 56(4) Oxford Econ Pap 563; Michael L Ross, ‘How Do Natural Resources Influence Civil War? Evidence from Thirteen Cases’ (2004) 58(1) Int Organ 35; Michael L Ross, ‘What Do We Know about Natural Resources and Civil War?’ (2004) 41(3) J Peace Res 337; Arvind Ganesan and Alex Vines, ‘Engine of War: Resources, Greed, and the Predatory State ’ in
Human Rights and Armed Conflict: Human Rights Watch World Report (Human Rights Watch 2004); Macartan
Humphreys, ‘Natural Resources, Conflict, and Conflict Resolution: Uncovering the Mechanisms’ (2005) 49(4) J Confl Resolut 508; Päivi Lujala, ‘The Spoils of Nature: Armed Civil Conflict and Rebel Access to Natural Resources’ (2010) 47(1) J Peace Res 15; R De Koning, 'Controlling Conflict Resources in the Democratic Republic of Congo' (SIPRI Policy Brief Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, July 2010)
62
explain the connection between natural resources and insecurity have attributed the insecurity to poor governance and institutional incapacity, where the institutional capacity of the state can be weakened because corruption, neglect of the military, and policy decisions by the state.195 This understanding has been adopted by the UN in its work surrounding the
link between resources, security, and peace.196 In UNSC resolutions, statements, and debates
concerning the post-conflict reconstruction of conflict rich areas, there are significant references to the importance of Governments gaining control over those regions where natural resources are prevalent, as well as ensuring the good governance and transparency of extractive industries.197
For example, the more recent resolutions concerning the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Liberia emphasise the importance both of transparency and of implementing sustainable natural resource exploitation.198 In this context, natural resources are referred to
as a benefit for the well-being of citizens and countries, and for their sustainable development. These associations highlight the integration of sustainable development practices in the UNSC practice surrounding environment/security links. They further repeat the assumption that economic and social development, democracy, good governance, and the recognition of human rights can help create and maintain peace.
Therefore, the solution put forward by western states and international institutions is to incorporate ‘others’ (the global south, women, marginalised communities, and the
Greed and Grievance: Natural Resource Characteristics and Conflicts in Africa' (Paper No 243 Institute for
Security Studies, January 2013) <http://www.issafrica.org/uploads/Paper243.pdf> accessed 19 June 2015; Maarten Bavinck, Lorenzo Pellegrini and Erik Mostert (eds), Conflicts over Natural Resources in the Global South
– Conceptual Approaches (Leiden: CRC Press/Balkema 2014).
195 Le Billon, 'Political Ecology of War', 566-567; Humphreys, 'Natural Resources, Conflict', 513; Lujala, 'Spoils of
Nature', 16; see also Frederick van der Ploeg, 'Natural Resources: Curse or Blessing?' (Working Paper No 3125 Centre for Economic Studies and Liebniz Institute for Economic Research, University of Munich 2010)
<http://hdl.handle.net/10419/38934> accessed 31 December 2012; Frederick van der Ploeg and Dominic Rohner, 'War and Natural Resource Exploitation' (Working Paper No 481 Insititute for Empirical Research in
Economics, University of Zurich 4 March 2010) <http://ssrn.com/abstract=1566820> accessed 19 June 2015.
196 UNEP, From Conflict to Peacebuilding (2009); UNEP, Sierra Leone: Environment, Conflict and Peacebuilding
Assessment. Technical Report (UNEP Post Conflict Assessments, 2010); UNEP, ‘Good Governance of Natural
Resources is Vital for Peace and Economic Development in Darfur: UNEP Study’ (Khartoum, 5 April 2013) <http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=2713&ArticleID=9457&l=en> accessed 7 April 2015; see also Global Witness, Lessons UNlearned: How the UN and Member States Must do
More to End Natural Resource-Fuelled Conflicts (Global Witness Limited 2010).
197 UNSC Resolution 1306 The Situation in Sierra Leone (5 July 2000) UN Doc S/RES/1306, preamble (8); UNSC
Resolution 1457 DRC (24 January 2003) UN Doc S/RES/1457, ¶3-¶4; UNSC Resolution 1521 Liberia (22 December 2003) UN Doc S/RES/1521, ¶14; UNSC Res 1533 (2004), preamble (4); UNSC Resolution 1579 Liberia (12 December 2004) UN Doc S/RES/1579, preamble (12); UNSC Resolution 2021 (2011), preamble (7); UNSC Res 2128 (2013), preamble (5)-(6), ¶12.
198 E.g. UNSC Resolution 1509 Liberia (19 September 2003) UN Doc S/RES/1509, ¶3(r); UNSC Resolution 1925
Democratic Republic of Congo (28 May 2010) UN Doc S/RES/1925, ¶12(r); UNSC Res 2128 (2013), preamble (5)-(6), ¶12; UNSC Verbatim Record (19 June 2013) UN Doc S/PV.6982 (Resumption 1), 3, and 5; UNSC Res 2198 (2015), preamble (14) – (15), ¶20-26, ¶29; see also UNSC Presidential Statement 4 (Peace and security in Africa) (15 April 2013) UN Doc S/PRST/2013/4.
63
environment) into the global economic and security communities through a variety of development strategies.199 This approach mirrors the approach taken in the security and
development strategies of some states who also frame the value of the environment in terms of its usefulness for sustainable development and security. In this way, environment/security links are incorporated into the strategy of economic liberalisation, human rights, the rule of law, and neoliberal development.200 Therefore, it features within development activities to
the extent that it provides humanity’s basic survival needs, resources for livelihood security, subsistence agriculture, and economic development. 201
Neo-Malthusian arguments have resurfaced in more recent research examining environment/security links.202 They are present in the discussions surrounding food
security, climate change, and population growth. For example, the United Nations World Food Programme identifies food insecurity as a cause of violence, while the Wilson Centre proposes that population growth and resource scarcity can escalate conflict.203 These
assumptions inform broader discussions concerning population growth, development, and conflict.204 Further, they inform sustainable development objectives as they view sustainable
development as a solution to such insecurity and potential conflict.
Therefore, the environmental scarcity/conflict linkages portrayed in this body of research have been refined and continue to be analysed in the context of food security, climate change, and insecurity. While such links have been criticised for ignoring socio-economic considerations of insecurity,205 they have had significant influence on the policy responses
by NSAs, states, and international institutions in developing countries. Delving underneath these responses by such actors, it is possible to identify the argument that liberal governmentality and ‘values’ can contribute towards achieving security. Further, they
199 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Risks and Opportunities from Natural
Resources and Environmental Peacebuilding in the Central African Republic (IUCN-UNEP-WWF 2009); United
Nations Development Group, Natural Resource Management in Transition Settings (UNDG-ECHA Guidance Note, 2013); UNEP and UNDP, The Role of Natural Resources in Disarmament, Demobilization and
Reintegration: Addressing the Risks and Seizing Opportunities (United Nations Environment Programme and the
United Nations Development Programme 2013).
200 Oliver P Richmond, ‘Human Security and the Liberal Peace: Tensions and Contradictions’ (2006) 7(2)
Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations 75, 75.
201 United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report, 29.
202 E.g. Bill Richardson, ‘The New Realism’ (2008)(93) The National Interest 86; Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H.
Ehrlich, ‘Can a Collapse of Global Civilization be Avoided?’ (2013) 280(1754) Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences; and criticisms by Robert Fletcher, Jan Breitling and Valerie Puleo, ‘Barbarian Hordes: The Overpopulation Scapegoat in International Development Discourse’ (2014) 35(7) Third World Quarterly 1195.
203 E.g. Brinkman and Hendrix, 'Food Insecurity and Violent Conflict'; Simmons, Harvesting Peace (2013), 20. 204 E.g. J. Anthony Cassils, ‘Overpopulation, Sustainable Development, and Security: Developing an Integrated
Strategy’ (2004) 25(3) Popul Environ 171; Scott Victor Valentine, ‘Disarming the Population Bomb’ (2010) 17(2) Int J Sust Dev World 120.
205 Fletcher, Breitling and Puleo, 'Barbarian Hordes', 1200; see also Nancy Peluso and Michael Watts, ‘Violent
Environments: Response’ in Geoffrey D. Dabelko (ed), Environmental Change and Security Report (Issue No. 9, Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars 2003).
64
indicate a growth interconnection between different areas of international interest, such as the economy, trade, development, and the environment, particularly in the context of natural resources and conflict. Therefore, environment/security links manifest themselves in debates concerning access to resources for food security as well as more traditional considerations of economic production and control.
3.3.2 Human Security
Another approach that connects the environment and security is the concept of ‘human security’. This concept proposed to make humans the referent object of security as a response to the incidences of civil war, underdevelopment, and intra-state conflicts that occurred in the immediate post-Cold War period.206 In doing so, it transformed ‘security’
from securing the territory of states to securing people, irrespective of any axes of difference.207 The concept sought to encourage policymakers and scholars to reconceive
international security as ‘something more than the military defence of state interests and territory.’208 Therefore, the concept is both explanatory and normative. Where
environment/security connections are present, they are framed as part of its attempt to protect and empower individuals in order to promote and maintain international peace and security.209
There is no one, single unified paradigm of human security. Roland Paris describes the concept as ambiguous, contested, and permutated through many different interpretations.210
However, the 1994 Report by the United Nations Development Programme, Human
Development Report and the 2003 Report by the Commission on Human Security, Human Security Now have been fundamental to creating a vision of human security as a basis for
international action and for action by international institutions.211 These two reports framed